Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + AT Service Tax - 2008 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (2) TMI 172 - AT - Service TaxDemands confirmed by disallowing credit taken on the strength of allocation chart issued by input service distributor, on the grounds that the input service distributor had not got registered before credit was taken and also for the reason that allocation chart is not a valid duty paying documents denial of credit is correct waiver of pre-deposit not granted
Issues: Applications for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penalty based on disallowed credit taken on the strength of an allocation chart issued by an input service distributor.
Analysis: 1. Issue of Waiver of Pre-deposit: The Tribunal heard both sides on the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penalties. The demands were confirmed by disallowing credit taken based on an allocation chart issued by the input service distributor. The grounds for disallowance included the distributor not being registered before the credit was taken and the allocation chart not being a valid duty paying document as prescribed for availing credit. 2. Prima Facie Case for Total Waiver: The Tribunal found that no prima facie case for total waiver had been established by the applicants. While there was no evidence to show that the delay in granting registration to the input service distributor was due to department queries, it was noted that an allocation chart was not the prescribed document for availing credit. Considering the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal directed a pre-deposit of Rs. 3,00,000/- towards service tax in one appeal and Rs. 10,00,000/- in another appeal within eight weeks. Upon such deposit, the pre-deposit of the balance tax and penalty would be waived, and the recovery stayed pending the appeals. Non-compliance would lead to the vacation of stay and dismissal of appeals without prior notice. 3. Compliance Reporting: The parties were directed to report compliance by a specified date. The judgment was pronounced in court, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the directed pre-deposit amounts and timelines to avoid adverse consequences.
|